Sánchez Tena, Miguel ÁngelTorralbo Jiménez, PilarGiron, NataliaDe la Heras, BeatrizHerrero Vanrell, María Del RocíoArriola Villalobos, PedroDíaz Valle, DavidÁlvarez Barrientos, AlbertoBenítez Del Castillo Sánchez, José Manuel2024-01-232024-01-232010Sanchez, M. A., Torralbo-Jimenez, P., Giron, N., de la Heras, B., Herrero Vanrell, R., Arriola-Villalobos, P., Diaz-Valle, D., Alvarez-Barrientos, A., & Benitez-Del-Castillo, J. M. (2010). Comparative analysis of carmellose 0.5% versus hyaluronate 0.15% in dry eye: a flow cytometric study. Cornea, 29(2), 167–1710277-374010.1097/ICO.0b013e3181b11648https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/94626Purpose: To compare the effects of Viscofresh 0.5% (carmellose sodium 0. 5%) versus Lubristil (sodium hyaluronate 0.15%) in dry eye syndrome and to study the influence of these two treatments on the expression of various inflammatory markers by flow cytometry in impression cytology specimens. Methods: In this randomized, masked-observer, parallel group, single-center study, 15 patients with dry eye syndrome were randomized to sodium carmellose 0.5% or sodium hyaluronate 0.15% 1-month treatment after a 1-week washout period. Corneal staining with flurescein, breakup time, Schirmer 1 test with anesthesia (Jones test), and tear clearance were assessed. Besides, conjunctival impression cytology was performed to investigate inflammatory markers (CD3, CD11b, and HLA-DR) using flow cytometry. Results: Carmellose group shows statistical improvement compared with the hyaluronate group in breakup time, corneal staining, and HLA-DR. The two other inflammatory markers had also a tendency for a decreased expression in both groups, with no statistical significance. There were neither visual acuity loss nor other complications related to treatment. Conclusion: Both artificial tears improve dry eye signs and symptoms and inflammatory markers expression, with significant better results in carmellose group.engComparative Analysis of Carmellose 0.5% Versus Hyaluronate 0.15% in Dry Eye: A Flow Cytometric Studyjournal articlehttps://doi.org/10.1097/ICO.0b013e3181b11648restricted access61Flow cytometricHyaluronateCarmelloseImpression cytologyInflammatory markersCiencias de la SaludCiencias Biomédicas32 Ciencias Médicas